MAINS DAILY QUESTIONS & MODEL ANSWERS
Q1. What do you mean by fundamental structure doctrine? Explain its evolution and significance in the preservation of India’s constitution.
GS II – Constitution-related issues
- A 13-judge constitution court found in 1973 in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala that Article 368 of the constitution did not empower parliament to change the document’s essential framework. The precedent-setting ruling became known as the “basic structure” doctrine. According to this judicial doctrine, certain essential parts of the constitution cannot be changed or eliminated by parliamentary amendments. Various components of the basic structure theory have evolved throughout time, and they now serve as the foundation for judicial review of constitutional amendments.
The evolution of basic structural doctrine can be divided into three stages:
The first stage begins with Sankari Prasad’s decision and ends with I.C. Golaknath’s choice:
- In the Shankari Prasad case, the constitutionality of the First Amendment Act of 1951, which curtailed the right to property, was challenged. The court upheld the constitutionality of the first amendment and also concluded that Article 368 allows parliament to rewrite the constitution with no exception that core rights cannot be modified.
- The majority of the judges in the Sajjan Singh case found, using the same logic as in the Shankari Prasad case, that parliament, under Article 368, can change any section of the constitution, including basic rights.
- In Golak Nath vs. State of Punjab, however, the Supreme Court took a different stance, ruling that parliament could not curtail fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The court decided that Article 368 lacked substantial change power and instead just offers procedures for altering the constitution.
Second stage- Following the Golakhnath Scenario and the Keshavananda case decision:
- The battle between the judiciary and the legislature took a new turn after the Golakh Nath ruling.
- In response to Golakh Nath’s decision, the then-government implemented a number of constitutional modifications. The Constitutional Amendment Acts of the 24th, 25th, and 29th allowed Parliament the power to change or even eliminate any basic right.
- The Supreme Court ruled in the Keshavanada Bharti case that, while parliament has the authority to amend any provision of the constitution, it cannot use this authority to change or destroy its “basic structure.”
- The judges described many parts of the constitution’s “basic structure” in the decision. It featured the constitution’s supremacy, the republican and democratic form of government, the constitution’s secular nature, and the separation of powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary.
Third stage, following the Keshavanada Bharti case:
- The main evolution of this philosophy began during the emergency period, as evidenced by the Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain case. The 39th Amendment made it illegal to dispute the election of the President, Vice President, Speaker, and Prime Minister. The court defined independent election administration as a “basic structure” in the Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain case.
- In the Minerva Mill decision, the Supreme Court made important clarifications on the application of the basic structural concept. Under parliament’s limited capacity to change the constitution, two crucial considerations were added: harmony and balance between fundamental rights and directive principles, and judicial scrutiny.
The importance of basic structure in preserving the constitution:
- Bringing about social change: The theory promotes constitutional change, laying the path for substantial social transformation via peaceful democratic means.
- Helpful in consolidating democracy: True democracies are founded on the sovereignty of the people, not the rulers. The fundamental structure concept has kept Indian democracy from devolving into an authoritarian state.
- Providing checks and balances: The theory of separation of powers is a fundamental component of the basic framework. As a result, a balance has been struck between the obligations of Parliament and the Supreme Court in safeguarding the Indian Constitution’s seamless web.
- Since its inception in the 1970s, basic structure has evolved through various supreme court decisions. It is a means of giving energy to the living principles of the ‘Rule of Law’ and implies that no one is above the Constitution and that the Constitution is supreme.
Q2. Discuss the importance of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023. What are the various issues raised by the bill?
GS I – Government Policies and Interventions
- The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) bill is legislation that defines the rights and duties of citizens on the one hand, and the requirements of data fiduciaries to use gathered data properly on the other. The Bill aims to manage and protect the use of personal data by outlining users’ rights and duties, as well as enterprises’ obligations.
The Importance of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023:
- Right to privacy: The DPDP bill is viewed as a significant step towards addressing long-standing data protection concerns.
- Compliance and transparency: The bill calls for the establishment of the Data Protection Board of India, which will investigate noncompliance and levy penalties. The Board’s ability to operate as a digital office, processing complaints, allocating cases, and making judgements via techno-legal means, increases efficiency and transparency.
- A balance between preserving users’ rights and boosting digital businesses: Among the important business-friendly aspects of the law are the elimination of criminal penalties for noncompliance, the facilitation of foreign data transfers, and so on. The bill also guarantees data principals a full set of rights, providing responsibility to the data governance framework.
- Consent clause: Personal data can only be processed for authorised purposes with the individual’s consent. Before obtaining consent, a notification must be made. As a result, the bill establishes precise standards for responsibility and responsible data handling.
- Implementation of this measure will be beneficial to India’s trade negotiations, particularly with regions such as the European Union. Strong privacy regulations in India will be in line with international data protection standards such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), facilitating smoother data transfers and improving trade partnerships with privacy-conscious countries.
Among the issues raised by the bill are:
- Exemptions for the state: The Bill provides many exemptions for the processing of personal data by the state. Certain aspects of the bill may be avoided by the government due to exemptions for reasons such as national security, relations with other governments, and public order. Critics fear that these exemptions could impair privacy protections and limit the law’s efficacy.
- May impinge on the right to privacy: In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled that any infringement on the right to privacy must be proportionate to the need for such intervention. The Bill authorises the central government to exclude processing by government agencies from any or all provisions in the interest of achieving goals like as state security and public order. This begs the question of whether or not these exemptions will pass the proportionality test.
- The Bill does not address harm resulting from personal data processing: According to the Srikrishna Committee report from 2018, harm is a conceivable outcome of personal data processing. Material losses such as financial loss and loss of access to benefits or services are examples of harm. Identity theft, loss of reputation, discrimination, and unjustified surveillance and profiling are all possibilities. The DPDP bill does not address the risks of harm that may arise from data processing.
- There is no right to data portability or the right to be forgotten. The right to data portability allows data principals to receive and transfer their data from data fiduciaries for their own use. It gives the data owner more control over their data. The right to be forgotten refers to an individual’s ability to limit the disclosure of personal data on the internet. These rights are founded on autonomy, transparency, and accountability. These, however, are not included in the bill.
- Adequacy of protection in the case of cross-border data transfer: The Bill states that the government may restrict the transmission of personal data to specific countries via notification. This indicates that personal data may be transferred to any other country without restriction. Data held in another nation may be more exposed to breaches or unauthorised sharing with foreign governments and business companies if that country has strong data protection regulations.
- With the growth of the digital economy, user privacy is critical in the digital era. As a result, the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill provides legal support to the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) vs. Union of India. Individuals gain substantial rights under the measure, including increased awareness, decision-making autonomy, and control over their personal data.